THere is no way they can swtich to a 4-3, they'd need to get a overhaul on the entire front seven and get new DE's for starters...won't happen...I'm hoping Russ Grimm Gets the job. Dick LeBeua won't change his defense

THere is no way they can swtich to a 4-3, they'd need to get a overhaul on the entire front seven and get new DE's for starters...won't happen...I'm hoping Russ Grimm Gets the job. Dick LeBeua won't change his defense

I agree, it would mean a complete overhaul of the front 7 and a very lengthy rebuilding process. I cannot see Pittsburgh wanting to rebuild just yet. They are in a serious position to challange again for the Super Bowl, it wouldbe just cray to risk that.

I really do not think Pittsburgh is going to change defensive schemes and convert to the 4-3. It does not make any sense for them to do so, especially with the personnel they already have.

No matter who their new coach is, whether it be Rivera, Tomlin, Grimm, or a dark horse candidate like Cowher was, I highly doubt they would change what has been working for years in Pittsburgh and that is the 3-4.

People come up with the craziest ideas. No way Pittsburgh is switching to the 4-3. The Steelers are always a top notch D that finishes in the top 10 on a usual basis and for the most part are in the top 5 quite a bit. Plus why would you change a mastermind game plan that lebeau can only come up with.Personally I hope they don't sign Rivera or Tomlin.

It wouldn't make sense at the moment to switch to Cover 2. The overhaul would take several years to take place. And with such a dominant 3-4 NT like Hampton, youd be wasting his talents in the Cover 2.

I think however it would be somewhat appropriate to go to Cover 2. Since Pittsburgh is the true birthplace and predecessor of the scheme, its only appropriate that they go back to their roots and play a quick 4-3 defense.

I love teams sticking to their identity. I felt it adds to the rich history of the sport. The Giants, Steelers, and Bears should always be teams with punishing defenses and run heavy offenses. The Colts should always have a great offense. The 49ers should always be a WCO team. The Packers should always be a rich offensive team.

If I had it my way, different teams would stick to their identity all the time. It makes for great history. People's football philosophies and opinions would vary from region to region. It would make for more interesting football if it was played that way.

Me personally, I dislike what the Giants have become. We're too focused on the offensive side of the ball and the pass game. Our defense is soft, which is an embarassment to an organization always known for a punishing defense. We're not playing Giants football right now, and Id love to go back to our style of defense and smashmouth offense. Thats what we are. Thats what we do. Someone needs to send that memo to Coughlin.

It wouldn't make sense at the moment to switch to Cover 2. The overhaul would take several years to take place. And with such a dominant 3-4 NT like Hampton, youd be wasting his talents in the Cover 2.

I think however it would be somewhat appropriate to go to Cover 2. Since Pittsburgh is the true birthplace and predecessor of the scheme, its only appropriate that they go back to their roots and play a quick 4-3 defense.

I love teams sticking to their identity. I felt it adds to the rich history of the sport. The Giants, Steelers, and Bears should always be teams with punishing defenses and run heavy offenses. The Colts should always have a great offense. The 49ers should always be a WCO team. The Packers should always be a rich offensive team.

If I had it my way, different teams would stick to their identity all the time. It makes for great history. People's football philosophies and opinions would vary from region to region. It would make for more interesting football if it was played that way.

Me personally, I dislike what the Giants have become. We're too focused on the offensive side of the ball and the pass game. Our defense is soft, which is an embarassment to an organization always known for a punishing defense. We're not playing Giants football right now, and Id love to go back to our style of defense and smashmouth offense. Thats what we are. Thats what we do. Someone needs to send that memo to Coughlin.

Actually before the Parcells Era and dating even further back into history when the Giants were winning Championships pre-Super Bowl, they were actually probably more known for their offense.

It wouldn't make sense at the moment to switch to Cover 2. The overhaul would take several years to take place. And with such a dominant 3-4 NT like Hampton, youd be wasting his talents in the Cover 2.

I think however it would be somewhat appropriate to go to Cover 2. Since Pittsburgh is the true birthplace and predecessor of the scheme, its only appropriate that they go back to their roots and play a quick 4-3 defense.

I love teams sticking to their identity. I felt it adds to the rich history of the sport. The Giants, Steelers, and Bears should always be teams with punishing defenses and run heavy offenses. The Colts should always have a great offense. The 49ers should always be a WCO team. The Packers should always be a rich offensive team.

If I had it my way, different teams would stick to their identity all the time. It makes for great history. People's football philosophies and opinions would vary from region to region. It would make for more interesting football if it was played that way.

Me personally, I dislike what the Giants have become. We're too focused on the offensive side of the ball and the pass game. Our defense is soft, which is an embarassment to an organization always known for a punishing defense. We're not playing Giants football right now, and Id love to go back to our style of defense and smashmouth offense. Thats what we are. Thats what we do. Someone needs to send that memo to Coughlin.

Actually before the Parcells Era and dating even further back into history when the Giants were winning Championships pre-Super Bowl, they were actually probably more known for their offense.

Not really. In the 50s we were known for a punishing defense with Huff and a great run game with Gifford.

The 60s and 70s were miserable, and we tried building through offense and it failed miserably.

The time prior to the 50s we were balanced for the most part, but still had a strong emphasis on defense.

If they go 4-3, they need a complete overhaul of their front seven. In my opinion, that would be stupid.

Porter doesnt go anywhere. Farrior? Nowhere. DT would need a change, but complete overhaul? Hampton could still do his thing and hold blocks, but overall I agree in that they should not change. They need little work and health to be among the best, not a clean slate.

If they go 4-3, they need a complete overhaul of their front seven. In my opinion, that would be stupid.

Porter doesnt go anywhere. Farrior? Nowhere. DT would need a change, but complete overhaul? Hampton could still do his thing and hold blocks, but overall I agree in that they should not change. They need little work and health to be among the best, not a clean slate.

Aaron smith and Brett Kiesel couldn't be 4-3 DEs...Smith made the probowl last year as a 3-4 DE, we'd have to prolly get rid of him